Marcel LaFond Construction Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1963

142 N.L.R.B. 430 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Marcel LaFond , d/b/a Marcel LaFond Construction Company
and Construction and General Laborers Union Local 563,
AFL-CIO. Case No. AO-54. April 30, 1963
ADVISORY OPINION
This is a petition filed by Construction and General Laborers Union.
Local 563, AFL-CIO, herein called the Petitioner, for an Advisory
Opinion in conformity with Section 102.98 and 102.99 of the Board's•
Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended.
In pertinent part, the petition and attachments thereto allege as
follows :
1. The Petitioner is a labor organization representing building
construction laborers in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and elsewhere in
Minnesota.
2. Because of a labor dispute with Marcel LaFond, d/b/a Marcel
LaFond Construction Company, herein called the Employer, the Peti-
tioner, on February 13, 1963, commenced peaceful picketing of the
construction site at Belle Prairie, in Morrison County, Minnesota,
where the Employer, the primary Employer, was the general contrac-
tor. The picketing was carried on with signs notifying the public that
the Employer had no contract with the Petitioner on that jobsite.
3. Thereafter, on February 27, 1963, the Employer instituted an
injunction proceeding in the District Court, Seventh Judicial District,
Morrison County, Minnesota (Little Falls), Docket No. 21244, alleg-
ing, inter alia, that the picketing caused employees of certain secondary
subcontractors to cease working for their employers for the purpose of
inducing or compelling their employers to refrain from doing busi-
ness with the primary Employer at the construction site.
4. On February 27, 1963, the court issued an ex parte restraining
order enjoining the picketing.
5. The Employer is engaged at Little Falls, Minnesota, in business
as a general contractor in the building and construction industry.
6. In the district court proceeding, the parties stipulated, inter alia,
that during fiscal year ending August 31, 1962, the Employer pur-
chased from suppliers in Minnesota materials used in his construction
business valued at $95,746.04. Of these purchases, 60 percent or
$57,447.62 represented materials processed or manufactured outside of
Minnesota and shipped to local suppliers who, in turn, reshipped them
to the Employer. During the more recent 6-month period between
September 1, 1962, and March 1, 1963, the Employer made similar local
purchases of materials in the amount of $45,045.06 of which 60 per-
cent of $27,027.34 represented materials processed or manufactured out-
side the State of Minnesota.
7. The district court has made no finding with respect to the afore-
mentioned commerce data.
142 NLRB No. 42.
DUBO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION 431
8. Pursuant to a stipulation between the parties, the hearing in
the district court to determine the Petitioner's special appearance and
objections to the court's jurisdiction has been held in abeyance pending
the issuance of the Advisory Opinion herein.
9. No representation or unfair labor practice proceeding involving
the same labor dispute is pending before the Board.
10. Although served with the Petition for Advisory Opinion, the
Employer filed no response as provided by the Board's Rules and
Regulations.
On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opinion that :
1. The Employer is a general contractor engaged in the building
and construction industry at Little Falls, Minnesota.
2. The current Board standard for the assertion of jurisdiction over
nonretail enterprises within its statutory jurisdiction requires an an-
nual minimum of $50,000 inflow or outflow across State lines, direct or
indirect. Siemon8 Mailing Service, 122 NLRB 81, 85.
3. During the fiscal year ending August 31, 1962, the Employer
made purchases of materials in excess of $50,000 from local suppliers,
who themselves received the materials from outside the State of
Minnesota. During the more recent 6-month period between Septem-
ber 1, 1962, and March 1, 1963, the Employer made similar local pur-
chases of out-of-State processed or manufactured materials valued
at $27,027.34, which, projected over a 1-year period, would exceed
$50,000.1 As these purchases of out-of-State materials constitute in-
direct inflow as defined in the Siemons decision and as they exceed
$50,000 annually, on an actual or projected basis, the Employer's op-
erations would satisfy the Board's standard for the assertion of
jurisdiction over nonretail enterprises.
Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section 102.103 of the
Board's Rules and Regulations, that, on the facts present herein, the
Board would assert jurisdiction over the Employer's operations with
respect to labor disputes cognizable under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the
Act.
1 See City Line Open Hearth Ino., 141 NLRB No. 74; Quality Coal Corporation, 139
NLRB 492; Sequim Lumber and Supply Company, 123 NLRB 1097.
Dubo Manufacturing Corporation and United Steelworkers of
America, AFL-CIO. Cases Nos. 8-CA-2700 and 8-CA-2820.
May 1, 1963
NOTICE
On August 28, 1962, Trial Examiner Sidney Sherman issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceedings and the pro-
ceedings were thereafter transferred to the Board. Subsequently,
142 NLRB No. 47.